Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

I generally do not practice landlord tenant law, but I faced this issue a couple years ago in one of my probate cases (deceased property owner rentedout garage converted without permits and not to code) and was advised by UD
counsel that if the property could not lawfully be rented as a dwelling when the tenant rented the place, then that precluded any ability of a
landlord to prevail in a UD case against the tenant unless the LAMC 151.09relocation fees are first paid to the tenant.
Mark T. Jessee
Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
"A Debt Relief Agency"
50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
(805) 497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)
In a message dated 5/28/2014 1:48:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com writes:
If I am not mistaken, you can still evict them to terminate the tenancy
and get a writ of possession even though you can't pay the money to make them
move. Help me out here. . .
Renay
I generally do not practice landlord tenant law, but I faced this issue a
couple years ago in one of my probate cases (deceased property owner rented out
garage converted without permits and not to code) and was advised by UD
counsel that if the property could not lawfully be rented as a dwelling
when the tenant rented the place, then that precluded any ability of alandlord to prevail in a UD case against the tenant unless the LAMC
151.09 relocation fees are first paid to the tenant.

Mark T.
JesseeLaw Offices of Mark T. Jessee"A Debt Relief Agency"50 W.Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200Thousand Oaks, CA 91360(805) 497-5868 (805)
497-5864 (Facsimile)

In a message dated 5/28/2014 1:48:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com writes:




If I am
not mistaken, you can still evict them to terminate the tenancy and get a writ
of possession even though you can't pay the money to make them move.
Help me out here. . .
Renay

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

If I am not mistaken, you can still evict them to terminate the tenancy and
get a writ of possession even though you can't pay the money to make them
move. Help me out here. . .
Renay
If I am not mistaken, you can still evict them to terminate the tenancy and get a writ of possession even though you can't pay the money to make them move. Help me out here. . .
Renay

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Deposits can be considered consumer debts with a limit on amount to priority
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 27, 2014, at 9:16 PM, "Mark Jessee jesseelaw@aol.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>
> I know of no reason why monies due tenant would not be dischargeable. However the real problem I think is going to be getting that occupant out of the property because they don't have to move until they are paid the relocation fees. Your potential debtor is in a Catch-22 situation.
>
> Mark Jessee
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 27, 2014, at 5:39 PM, "'Mark J. Markus' bklawr@yahoo.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>>
>>
>> No, they are refusing to vacate until the potential debtor pays the fee. I have no idea whether the alleged violation exists or not. I'm just trying to determine that IF it does, would it be dischargeable.
>>
>> I wouldn't file the bankruptcy case until after everything was resolved in state court and the tenants were gone.
>>
>> *************************
>> Mark J. Markus
>> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>> Mailing Address Only:
>> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency
>> ________________________________________________
>> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited.
>> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication.
>> On 5/27/2014 5:05 PM, R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>>> Just a question. . . are they out yet? Isn't an ongoing violation until they leave? Until they are out, won't it become a post petition debt?
>
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I know of no reason why monies due tenant would not be dischargeable. However the real problem I think is going to be getting that occupant out of the property because they don't have to move until they are paid the relocation fees. Your potential debtor is in a Catch-22 situation.
Mark Jessee
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 27, 2014, at 5:39 PM, "'Mark J. Markus' bklawr@yahoo.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>
> No, they are refusing to vacate until the potential debtor pays the fee. I have no idea whether the alleged violation exists or not. I'm just trying to determine that IF it does, would it be dischargeable.
>
> I wouldn't file the bankruptcy case until after everything was resolved in state court and the tenants were gone.
>
> *************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
> Mailing Address Only:
> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency
> ________________________________________________
> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication.
> On 5/27/2014 5:05 PM, R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>> Just a question. . . are they out yet? Isn't an ongoing violation until they leave? Until they are out, won't it become a post petition debt?
>
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Just a question. . . are they out yet? Isn't an ongoing violation until
they leave? Until they are out, won't it become a post petition debt?
Just a question. . . are they out yet? Isn't an ongoing violation until they leave? Until they are out, won't it become a post petition debt?

The post was migrated from Yahoo.